I'm not sure I see under what system classics - or any field of academic work - wouldn't have to make its case to *someone.* We don't farm our own food, we don't build our own buildings. We're going to need, at some point, to exchange our classics for someone else's bread.
You can mediate that interaction via markets. You can also mediate it via state action (read: the government can pay for it) - but then we have to reach out to voters to convince them that the government should still pay for it.
-
-
A technocratic state can disintermediate those voters, but then we need to reach out to those technocrats. To be fair, reaching out to aristocrats under oligarchic forms of government is a historical classical strength, but I rather like democracy.
-
But no matter what the economic or political system in place here, you're still going to end up with 'academics will need to make the case for their relevance and usefulness to people who are not them' because that's how specialization works.
Keskustelun loppu
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
Hey I recognize that argument! It's the one the U.S. uses to deny health care to its citizens! But honestly I'd rather see public facing classics working to convince voters than shoring up its share of a slice of the population steered towards its content by algorithms
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.